|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:32 pm Post subject: Security vs. Security Theater |
 |
|
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/11/beyond_security.html
| Quote: |
Terrorism is rare, far rarer than many people think. It's rare because very few people want to commit acts of terrorism, and executing a terrorist plot is much harder than television makes it appear. The best defenses against terrorism are largely invisible: investigation, intelligence, and emergency response. But even these are less effective at keeping us safe than our social and political policies, both at home and abroad. However, our elected leaders don't think this way: they are far more likely to implement security theater against movie-plot threats.
...
Our penchant for movie plots blinds us to the broader threats. And security theater consumes resources that could better be spent elsewhere.
Any terrorist attack is a series of events: something like planning, recruiting, funding, practising, executing, aftermath. Our most effective defenses are at the beginning and end of that process -- intelligence, investigation, and emergency response -- and least effective when they require us to guess the plot correctly. By intelligence and investigation, I don't mean the broad data-mining or eavesdropping systems that have been proposed and in some cases implemented -- those are also movie-plot stories without much basis in actual effectiveness -- but instead the traditional "follow the evidence" type of investigation that has worked for decades.
Unfortunately for politicians, the security measures that work are largely invisible. Such measures include enhancing the intelligence-gathering abilities of the secret services, hiring cultural experts and Arabic translators, building bridges with Islamic communities both nationally and internationally, funding police capabilities -- both investigative arms to prevent terrorist attacks, and emergency communications systems for after attacks occur -- and arresting terrorist plotters without media fanfare. They do not include expansive new police or spying laws. Our police don't need any new laws to deal with terrorism; rather, they need apolitical funding. These security measures don't make good television, and they don't help, come re-election time. But they work, addressing the reality of security instead of the feeling.
The arrest of the "liquid bombers" in London is an example: they were caught through old-fashioned intelligence and police work. Their choice of target (airplanes) and tactic (liquid explosives) didn't matter; they would have been arrested regardless.
But even as we do all of this we cannot neglect the feeling of security, because it's how we collectively overcome the psychological damage that terrorism causes. It's not security theater we need, it's direct appeals to our feelings. The best way to help people feel secure is by acting secure around them. Instead of reacting to terrorism with fear, we -- and our leaders -- need to react with indomitability. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Reggie
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's all a dog & pony show to swindle taxpayers.
Take for example, air security. The TSA does its dog & pony show inside the airports where the passengers (taxpayers) are. Meanwhile, air cargo gets loaded onto the exact same passenger flights with little to no inspection. The air freight isn't searched since passengers don't see the freight being loaded and most passengers aren't even aware that it even happens. Watch a YouTube video of the Chechnyans hitting speed dial on their cell phone to dial-a-bomb beside of a Russian vehicle. It really would be that easy to blow up a passenger aircraft, but the TSA doesn't search freight, they just do their theatrics inside the airport since that's where the theater audience is. They have to use theater to sucker the taxpayers into believing the money spent on all of that bullshit is worth it.
The terrorist attack at Fort Hood also demonstrates how easy it is to carry out a terrorist attack. When that fort is that vulnerable, how vulnerable to you think the food court at the shopping mall is? How about school classrooms? How about churches? A Christian terrorist recently shot up a Unitarian church in Knoxville over their gay tolerance stance. A Muslim terrorist could have done it just as easily. The CIA and FBI couldn't stop 9/11 even when they were warned about it.
In short, the blogger is right. Terrorists attacks are rare because very few people want to commit acts of terrorism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Good post, Hater. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arthur Dent
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Location: Kochu whirld
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
+1
Not only do our politicians have to show some backbone - and not a la Bush style - but we do as well.
Not in your face, but resolute and calm.
Stop feeding the fear monster.
I'll just refer to this post:
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=157750&highlight=
Thanks Hater Depot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
